Terry would have done alot better than give a good fight. to be honest, I dont think Leonard would have given Terry a good fight. Like they say, the fight would be decided on styles and Terry's speed. ray couldnt deal with the speed of Norris that's why he handpicked so many opponents like kalule, lalonde, and Hagler-all plodders at the time. that's what most people here miss. You must remember this cardinal rule in boxing that say's you can't hit what you can't touch
A prime Norris would have been an excellent match for a prime Leonard but as chess players go, at the top level class would tell very late into a match. I see Leonard stopping Norris very late in a match that would require Ray's true greatness to see him through. Ray would trick Norris into making a costly mistake.
Don't get me wrong-Ray Leonard was great in his day but Terry's style was all wrong for him. If you notice, Leonard's style of taking out opponents required that they stand in front of him so that he could eventually wear them down with his combinations-the easy to hit types: Kalule, Green, Finch, etc, which allowed him to land reams of shots. But against fast, mobile guys like Terry who could move out of there fast, Leonard never had to deal with anyone like that, which is why he struggled greatly in their fight. All those years of fighting the big names, all the greats meant nothing on that night and it all came down to one reason-styles. Only those capable of delivering heavy leather had the power to take out Terry or hurt him with a shot and frankly, Ray Leonard didnt have that kind of power so he would be a loser every time they met-no matter when they met. Like they say in boxing, it all comes down to styles.
Yes but look at the rematch, Brown only won a single round on my card which was the 8th round if I remember correctly. Norris put on one of the greatest boxing clinics of all time in the rematch.
As would I, I must say that Rooster has opened my eyes to this also, I have both Leonards and Norris' DVD career set and after careful examination I think Norris would pull out a UD. Be fair Robbi, I'm pretty a boxing historian such as yourself has an boxing opinion that very few would agree with but it does'nt make you a joker to have that opinion right?
the fact that you say that Terry Norris is greater fighter than a peak Leonard is ridiculous you taking about the same Terry Norris that got iced in 4 Rds by Simon Brown and the same Terry Norris that lost on points to a guy I've never even heard of before called Derrick Kelly and he was'nt past his prime when he lost these fights , nothing against Terry but lets face the facts. :verysad
It's about time Rooster's posts were now boycotted. By everyone. We all respond as if we take him serious. It's about time all his posts were not responded to at all. :good
I don't think it really matters. Brown's destructive performance over Norris in the first match far overshadows that of Terry's efforts in the second fight. And frankly, I think it was the more memorable of the two. Additionally, I will ad that in both of those fights, Norris was facing an aging champion who by now was competing over his best fight weight. Norris was a very good fighter no doubt. But there's no getting around the fact that his best showings came against men who were either well past their best, coming off of layoffs or were naturals in lower weight classes. Ray Leonard, Donald Curry, John Mugabi and Simon Brown were in the twilight of their careers, and one of them sparked him badly. I don't see Norris surviving the 1980's scene with being anymore than a mid level contender or a brief alphabet titlist at best.
The problem is, he purposely preys on the newbies. Look at most of the people who respond to him. Most of them have only been posting here from about 2008-2009.